Clarion Wiki
Welcome to the Clarion Wiki The public information storehouse of Clarion News, and a database for truth seekers everywhere. Submission Guidelines: Although there will be many different types of articles, 'Research' and 'Summary' will take up the bulk of the information database. ‘Research’ will be articles that go into very great detail about specific subjects. ‘9/11’, for example, will be a folder with multiple articles within it that cite sources for everything in them, like ‘The hole in the Pentagon’. ‘'Summary'’ articles will attempt to bring all of the important information together to build a narrative or interpretation that will enlighten readers - these can be in the form of videos too (in fact, videos are going to be very important in the future as they can be brilliant summarisers). These comprehensive articles and summarizing videos will be the driving force of the Clarion's message. However, the information will only have lasting power if it is backed up with strong evidence. This is why we stress the importance of research articles. The following is a list of requirements all research articles must have before being posted to the database: Find the original sources Much of the information passed on to us has been on a very long journey, and during that time it has probably been through many iterations and subject to many interpretations. The most convincing source is the original source, whether that be government documents, statistics (with relevant methodology checks), testimonies etc. Absolute accuracy and full illumination of the facts about everything on Earth is just about impossible. First off, we are not privy to many of the things that happen within and shrouded by government and corporate agencies, and commenting on such things with little evidence will come across as presumptuous as best; however, we expect our contributors to go as deep as possible and only use the most reliable evidence. Everything must be backed up. Many libertarian/conspiracy websites assume that readers already know about and agree with their interpretations of events and therefore do not extrapolate or even give evidence to back up certain assertions. If research articles have already been written about the subject you are mentioning then link to it. For example; if you’re writing about 7/7 and you mention 9/11, then link to the article from yours. If there isn’t one, then consider writing that research article first or post it to the commission list. Find the opposition One important part of our methodology will be to deliberately seek out the most intelligent and reasoned opposing arguments we can find so as to hold our material to a thorough standard, whilst considering all views. Our articles and videos might even be built around the opposing argument. Anybody can argue with the average statist onYoutube comments, but could you go toe-to-toe with Noam Chomsky, for example? What better way to debate with people than know what the most common arguments are and have the evidence to combat them? Start again from the very beginning Maintain maximum objectivity - we must not assume anything. The first thing we may have to do is forget everything we know so well and start again from the very beginning. Even if after starting from scratch we come to the same conclusions as before, with research and verification, then we will have a much greater understanding of the supporting facts and will be able to refer to them even more competantly. Simply put, the more factual evidence we find the more successful we will be. Plain English The most eloquent speech--and the speech that is most effective when dealing with factual matters--is speech that seeks to explain exactly what one means in the least amount of words possible. Too many writers seem to want to decorate their language to emphasize their intelligence. This is not the same as ‘using big words’ as many have accused eloquent people of doing - it is adding too many ornate touches, and idiomatic phrases. This is why writers should use the least amount of words possible - long words are there so as not to use several short words to explain the concept. The wider vocabulary you have the better you can do this. For example, is it more effiecient to say ‘vocabulary’ or ‘the amount of words known by a person’? If the reader doesn’t understand the word ‘vocabulary’ then they can look it up - don’t clog up your articles with unnecessary explanation. Rare words can be defined in references. The clearest, most convincing speech is plain and simple speech. Ideas articles Clearly there are some subjects that use facts to a lesser degree, and an ‘Idea’ article is an example of that. These are articles that seek to explore concepts that can not be explicitly proven or disproven through research and facts but explored through deduction and discussion of morality. For example, an article could be titled ‘Is it right ''to avoid taxes?’. This is clearly not the same as a research or summary article. This is a lot more to do with perspective and isn’t tangible. These articles or videos can refer to research or summary articles but do not have to. These articles play an important part in the LC: where research and summary explains ''how, ideas explain why. Latest activity Category:Browse